The CEO of the startup building data centers for eventual low Earth orbit deployment told Molly O’Shea of the Sourcery podcast that he expects Elon Musk’s SpaceX to hold a “near monopoly on launches” over the next five to ten years, driven by Starship’s scale, launch cadence, and cost advantage.

Starcloud CEO Philip Johnston told O’Shea:

I’m very hopeful that other launch vehicles will be able to compete with SpaceX, but my general hot take is that SpaceX is going to have a near-monopoly on launch for at least the next five years, maybe ten.

I think Starship is way ahead of any other program, and even like Stokes Space—if their rocket works—their payloads are three tonnes versus 150-tonne payload for Starship. Especially with Gigafactory, so yeah, that’s it.

O’Shea asked Johnston about Jeff Bezos’ rocket company, Blue Origin, and whether it could challenge SpaceX’s launch dominance in the years ahead: 

The problem with Blue Origin’s rocket is they don’t have a reusable upper stage at the moment, and as I understand, they’re not even really trying to build a reusable upper stage.

So if they can get it flying, you’re talking about launch costs comparable maybe with Falcon 9, although their quotes we’ve had are way higher than that.

.@Starcloud_ CEO @PhilipJohnston expects SpaceX to have a “near monopoly on launch” for the next 5–10 years:

“Starship is way ahead of any other program.”

“The manufacturing that they’re ramping up is insane—like building three Starships per day potentially with their… pic.twitter.com/qGCWPJ3cIh

— sourcery (@sourceryy) April 28, 2026

Musk’s SpaceX is gearing up for the largest IPO ever, which could value the rocket company at up to $2 trillion. At this valuation, Musk would likely become the first trillionaire.

The latest data from Bloomberg shows Musk’s net worth is around $646 billion. Larry Page of Google trails in the No. 2 spot at $297 billion, with Bezos at No. 3 at $278 billion.

In December, we outlined for readers how to profit from space-based data centers, given that ground-based data centers are being delayed or canceled, alarming the tech bros. This suggests that, with limited to no restrictions on space, space-based data centers will be the next big push – all hinging on the commercialization of Starship.

Authored by Neetika Walter via Interesting Engineering,

Researchers at Rice University have developed a water-based method that recovers valuable metals from spent lithium-ion batteries in minutes, offering a faster and lower-energy alternative to conventional recycling systems.

The new process targets key battery materials including lithium, cobalt, nickel, and manganese, which are in growing demand as electric vehicle and electronics production expands worldwide.

Battery recycling is becoming increasingly important as mineral supply chains tighten and nations seek to reduce dependence on newly mined materials. But many current recovery methods rely on harsh acids, toxic solvents, or long processing times.

Rice researchers say their new class of aqueous “amino chloride” solutions can extract metals quickly while avoiding many of those drawbacks.

Metals back, fast

“Traditional recycling methods often rely on harsh acids or slow, energy-intensive processes,” said study first author Simon M. King. “What we’ve shown is that you can achieve rapid, high-efficiency metal recovery using a much simpler, water-based system.”

The team focused on hydrometallurgical recycling, in which battery metals are dissolved into a liquid and later separated for reuse. It is considered one of the more scalable approaches, but common solvents can create environmental and cost challenges.

To improve the process, the researchers tested several amino chloride salts as alternative leaching agents. One compound, hydroxylammonium chloride, or HACl, delivered the best results.

In testing, the HACl solution extracted about 65 percent of key battery metals in just one minute at room temperature. Recovery rates climbed above 75 percent for several metals with slightly longer treatment times.

That speed is notable because many recycling systems require elevated temperatures or extended reaction periods, both of which increase energy use and operating costs.

Water beats solvents

“We were surprised by just how fast the reaction occurs, especially without the involvement of high temperatures,” King said. “Within the first minute, we’re already seeing the majority of the metal extraction take place.”

Researchers said replacing traditional organic solvents with water lowered viscosity, allowing molecules to move more freely and accelerate reactions. Water-based chemistry also simplifies waste handling and may reduce environmental risks.

The team used experiments and modeling to understand why the solution performed so well. While acidity and chloride ions help dissolve metals, the researchers found that a built-in redox-active nitrogen center in HACl played a major role.

“While the rapid metal dissolution is very interesting, what is most exciting is that this highlights the generic chemical properties that are the major drivers for efficient leaching,” said Sohini Bhattacharyya.

“That redox capability gives it a major advantage over other similar systems we tested.” After extraction, the recovered metals were reprocessed into new battery materials, demonstrating a closed-loop recycling pathway.

The findings could help shape next-generation battery recycling plants by combining low-toxicity solvents with targeted chemistry that boosts speed and efficiency. With EV battery waste expected to rise sharply in the coming years, faster recovery methods may become increasingly valuable.

The study was published in Small.

With Kevin Warsh having won the backing of the Senate Banking Committee on a 13-11 party-line vote to be the next chair of the Federal Reserve, it’s pretty much a done deal that this will be Jerome Powell’s final press conference as Fed Chair.

And while The Fed took no action – as 100% expected – the question remains whether Powell will lean hawkish (oil crisis means inflation tsunami) or dovish (higher costs drag on economy and need support) despite the most dissents (3 hawkish-er, 1 dovish-er) since 1992…

“The stink of stagflation is in the air,” Senator Elizabeth Warren warned, adding that confirmation of Warsh would help Trump dominate the Fed’s monetary policy.

The combination of Warsh’s calls for a smaller balance sheet, new ways to think about inflation and communication changes put the onus on Warsh to make clear he’ll defend the Fed’s independence, said EY-Parthenon Chief Economist Gregory Daco.

“Taken together, this points to a more centralized, less transparent and potentially more politically-exposed policy framework,” he said.

But all of that is for another day as today is Powell’s big finale where he will likely note both the upside risks to inflation and the downside risks to the labor market and growth.

But which way will he lean?

If Powell’s final comments mirror those of Daly ( that if policy were left unchanged all year, “that would be a good restraint on inflation, but not so restrictive to hurt the labor market”), markets would read that as very hawkish.

We shall see… for now, the market is not leaning one way or another with zero rate-changes priced in until at least 2027.

Finally, Powell might get asked whether he has decided how long he will stay on at the Fed as a Governor. He will likely respond that he doesn’t have anything to add to his comments from the March press conference.

Watch Fed Chair Powell’s final press conference live here (due to start at 1400ET):

Authored by Jack Phillips via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche on April 29 said that President Donald Trump did not order the Department of Justice (DOJ) to file more charges against former FBI Director James Comey over a social media post that he made last year.

Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche (L) speaks alongside FBI Director Kash Patel during a press conference about the White House Correspondents’ Dinner shooting, at the Justice Department in Washington on April 27, 2026. Madalina Kilroy/The Epoch Times

“Of course not, absolutely, positively not,” Blanche told “CBS Mornings” when he asked whether the president directed him to pursue new charges against Comey. “This is something that has been investigated for nearly a year now, and the results of that investigation is that a grand jury returned an indictment.”

On Tuesday, a grand jury returned an indictment against Comey over an Instagram post he made in May 2025 with a photo of seashells arranged on a beach to say “86 47.” Federal prosecutors said it was a threat to assassinate Trump. Comey later deleted the post and said that he thought the sell arrangement was a political message, not a call to violence.

“I didn’t realize some folks associate those numbers with violence,” and “I oppose violence of any kind so I took the post down,” Comey wrote at the time.

The criminal case is the second in months against Comey. A separate and unrelated indictment against the former FBI director was dismissed in late 2025 after a court ruled that the U.S. attorney who brought the charges was appointed in an unlawful manner.

Prosecutors said in a news release Tuesday of the new charge that it was a message that a “reasonable recipient who is familiar with the circumstances would interpret as a serious expression of an intent to do harm to the President of the United States.”

Comey was charged with threatening the president and transmitting a threat in interstate commerce. He could face a maximum sentence of 10 years in prison, according to the Department of Justice.

“If anybody in this country thinks—especially given what happened over the past couple of years with respect to President Trump—that it is okay for anybody to threaten the president of the United States … and then have the media or others say, well that’s not serious, then we have a bigger problem than I even imagined in this country,” Blanche told CBS on April 29.

The acting attorney general added that “anybody who tries to put forward some narrative that this is just about seashells or something to the contrary is missing the point,” stressing, “You cannot threaten the president of the United States.”

Comey was fired by Trump months into the president’s first term, and the two men have openly feuded ever since. Blanche, a former deputy attorney general who previously worked as Trump’s personal attorney, was elevated earlier this month to replace Pam Bondi, the first attorney general of Trump’s second term in office.

Responding to the new indictment, Comey released a video through Substack on April 28 in which he denied any wrongdoing.

“Well, they’re back. This time about a picture of seashells on a North Carolina Beach a year ago, and this won’t be the end of it. But nothing has changed with me. I’m still innocent, I’m still not afraid, and I still believe in the independent federal judiciary. So let’s go,” he said in the video.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Since the last FOMC meeting (on March 18), gold has been clubbed like a baby seal (“EM piggy bank”) while stocks and oil have surged (with the former ignoring the peril of the latter)…

During that time, Fed rate-change expectations have swung violently from a full rate-cut to a full rate-hike and fallen back to no change at all in 2026, notably (hawkishly) rising in the last few days as oil prices surged back to war highs…

On the macro front, The Fed’s dual mandate is in play as (surprisingly) inflation has surprised to the downside while growth has surprised to the upside…

Notably, The Fed doesn’t need to cut rates today for monetary policy to get easier as inflation expectations are rising so much that ex-ante real rates have fallen to the lowest since November and are close to turning negative…

As we detailed earlier, recent labor data (March jobs, ADP, claims) has shown resilience and potentially some green shoots. To Bank of America, this should reduce the sense of urgency to shore up the labor market among the doves.

But, as a result of latent inflation threats, some of the most prominent doves on the committee have changed their tone of late. In a speech last week, Waller emphasized not only upside risks to inflation from the Iran war.

Nevertheless, with all that behind us, the market is expecting a big fat nothingburger from Fed Chair Powell’s last (maybe) FOMC meeting, but is expecting an indication of ‘two-sided risks’ with a single dissent (from Miran calling for a 25bps cut).

What The Fed Did and Said…

Most divided (8-4) Fed in 34 years votes to hold rates unchanged as expected BUT… With 4 No Votes, Powell’s Final Meeting Garners Most Dissents in 34 Years

*FED: HAMMACK, KASHKARI, LOGAN VOTED AGAINST EASING BIAS, BACKED

*FED SAYS GOVERNOR STEPHEN MIRAN DISSENTS IN FAVOR OF RATE CUT

Fed officials also changed slightly their characterization of the uncertainty around the conflict in Iran: 

“Developments in the Middle East are contributing to a high level of uncertainty about the economic outlook.”

Back in March they said the implications for the US economy were “uncertain.”

In the spirit of Fed transparency, Powell leaves on a confusing note.

So, three of the dissenters opposed “inclusion of an easing bias.”

And yet the actual language of the statement arguably doesn’t specify such a bias.

It says that the committee would be prepared “to adjust the stance of monetary policy as appropriate.”

That doesn’t specify cutting interest rates.

It’s interesting that the trio of dissenters on the bias basically labeled this language as a bias to ease. Because arguably it’s neutral:

The Committee would be prepared to adjust the stance of monetary policy as appropriate if risks emerge that could impede the attainment of the Committee’s goals.

The “goals” of course are price stability and maximum employment.

But it appears that the trio views this language as mainly attaching to the jobs mandate, it seems to us.

Fed officials said the economy is expanding “at a solid pace” with “low” job gains and the unemployment rate “little changed”. That’s all the same as in March.
 
Their characterization of inflation changed slightly:

“Inflation is elevated, in part reflecting the recent increase in global energy prices.”

However, as Bloomberg notes, in central bank world every word matters, and there has been extensive debate around the characterization of “additional adjustments.” Some Fed watchers deem the wording as signaling most policymakers still see a rate cut as their next likely step, in what’s known as an easing bias. That bias stayed unchanged today:

“In considering the extent and timing of additional adjustments to the target range for the federal funds rate, the Committee will carefully assess incoming data, the evolving outlook, and the balance of risks.”

Read the full red-line of The Fed statement below:

Authored by Micah Zimmerman via Bitcoin Magazine,

Bitcoin 2026 speaker Alex Leishman used his Nakamoto Stage talk, titled “We’re Not Fixing Money to Build More Casinos,” to deliver a sharp warning that modern finance is drifting toward a gambling model and away from basic banking. 

Leishman, CEO of River, said the American dream feels out of reach for many people as housing costs rise, student debt lingers, and wages lag, and argued that this pressure helps explain why prediction markets and betting features are spreading through mainstream financial apps. 

In his view, a system that once promised stable savings now pushes people toward risk if they want a shot at financial freedom.

Leishman opened by describing a growing belief that “more and more people are coming to the conclusion” that they need to gamble to get ahead. He said finance and entertainment have merged on the phone screen, with products that look like investing tools but function like casinos. 

He pointed to platforms that promote constant trading and outcome bets, and said this environment tells users that the safe path of saving no longer works, only high‑risk wagers do. The result, he argued, is a landscape in which households face a choice between stagnation and speculative bets framed as empowerment.

Leishman contrasted today’s market with an earlier era in which a bank was a place that kept money safe. Banking and gambling were separate activities, he said, governed by different norms and expectations. Prediction markets, he argued, have given financial institutions a rationale to fold sports betting and event wagers into apps that once focused on savings and investing. 

That change, he said, blurs lines for users who open a finance app and find a casino.

Gambling is correlated with stress, debt distress

Leishman linked this trend to research that shows gambling correlates with higher levels of debt distress and personal bankruptcy. He said gambling “isn’t good for society” and argued that the rapid spread of online betting should concern policymakers and industry leaders. 

In the past, a person had to walk into a casino to place a bet; now, he said, anyone with a phone can gamble from the couch or the checkout line. The distance between everyday life and high‑risk wagering has collapsed into a few taps on an app, with push notifications and promotions designed to keep people engaged.

He accused parts of the crypto and fintech sector of not being honest about this direction. The industry “shouldn’t lie” about what it is building, he said, because many products marketed as tools for financial freedom depend on user losses and trading churn. 

He described two futures: one in which traditional banks continue to grow rich off customer deposits while providing little yield or transparency, and another in which fintech firms double down on prediction markets and sports betting as core revenue lines. In both cases, he argued, ordinary customers lose: they either watch their savings erode in low‑yield accounts or face rising odds of financial harm on betting‑style platforms.

Bitcoin banks can grow your money without gambling

As an alternative, Leishman framed bitcoin banking as a third path. He said bitcoin banks can allow wealth generation without gambling by pairing sound money with interest on cash and bitcoin balances.

“50 countries in the last 5 years have increased their regulatory friendliness to Bitcoin,” Leishman said.

In that model, clients can succeed through saving and prudent risk, not through repeated wagers on short‑term events. He pointed to growing institutional and sovereign interest in holding bitcoin as a sign that the asset is maturing into a reserve instrument. 

From his perspective, banks that integrate bitcoin in a conservative, savings‑focused way can oppose both the low‑yield status quo and the casino trend in fintech.

Leishman closed with a prediction that “all institutions will want to become bitcoin banks” as the asset gains broader acceptance. He argued that banks and fintech firms that align with bitcoin, proof‑of‑reserves, and straightforward savings products will stand apart from casino‑like competitors that depend on user losses. 

In his telling, the real promise of a “financial revolution” is not more ways to gamble from a phone, but a system in which money holds its value, deposits are verifiable, and people can pursue financial freedom without turning their lives into a series of bets.

Amid reports that Vice President JD Vance is very seriously questioning the White House’s Iran War narrative along with the Pentagon’s rosy and overly positive updates on how things are going, over in Congress there’s growing alarm as Trump’s Operation Epic Fury is set to hit the 60-day mark on Friday. 

Republicans no doubt want to wrap things up fast, however, the latest reports say the White House is preparing for an extended Hormuz blockade of at least ‘months’ longer, per fresh WSJ reporting. There now appears to be a significant shift among Republicans underway, given that the 1973 War Powers Resolution requires that a US president must terminate unauthorized military operations within 60 days of initiating them.

The stickers have started to appear: from a gas station in Texas, submitted by a ZH reader.

Congress must then certify a need for continued military force in the instance that the nation faces an imminent threat. Already several war power initiatives have been effectively blocked on the House and Senate sides. 

But amid the ongoing Hormuz Strait blockade, Americans – and thus their representatives in Congress, are increasingly wary of the coming economic blowback. As we featured earlier on Wednesday, the average price for a gallon of gasoline hit its highest level in four years on Tuesday as the cost of a barrel of oil remains elevated amid Trump’s war of choice in the Middle East.

This has triggered talk among GOP leaders of the need to go ahead and vote on formal war authorization, even among the hawks. Below is a quick round-up of Congressional member quotes via Semafor:

Sen. Curtis: “It’s a big deal… There are a number of us having discussions about what that day means, what our response should be.”

Sen. Collins: “Sixty days is a trigger that requires Congress to act.”

Rep. Don Bacon: “We haven’t been doing combat over the last two weeks. I think it merits good discussion. In the end, I want us to finish the job.”

Sen. Hawley: Rubio’s “been pretty careful to comply with the statute. My hope is they’ll notify us that they’re drawing down offensive operations.”

Sen. Murkowski: “You’ve got to talk to us.” She warned that if that doesn’t happen, “you may see a change in the situation” in Congress.

Sen. Tillis: “This is going to be weeks or months away from resolution, and more likely the latter. So why not send a very clear signal to Iran” and authorize war for a 1 year?

And an unnamed GOP Senator is cited in the report as saying: “People cross some sort of threshold and start to be very uncomfortable with it. I am sensing restlessness among many of my colleagues.”

New: The war in Iran has cost U.S. taxpayers $25 billion thus far, the Pentagon tells Congress

— John Hudson (@John_Hudson) April 29, 2026

The White House has been steadily hailing the “successful” US naval blockade of Iranian reports. Still, as Reuters spells out Tuesday, “High oil prices are a risk for Trump’s fellow Republicans ahead of the midterm congressional elections in November.” Brent crude hit briefly reached $119/barrel on Wednesday amid signs of escalation, poised to overtake prior Iran war highs.

The rhetoric and predictions behind climate change “science” change so haphazardly, it’s a sure sign that the entire field of study is fraudulent.  If the manufactured hysteria is not enough to clue people in, the failed predictions of Al Gore should do the trick.

Former Vice President Al Gore warned a Hollywood audience this week that a “Gulf Stream collapse” could occur within 25 years, leading to an abrupt and devastating new Ice Age.  

Mr. Gore, now 78, appeared at the inaugural Sustainability in Entertainment Honors event, co-hosted by The Hollywood Reporter and the Sustainable Entertainment Alliance at Hotel Bel-Air in Los Angeles. He participated in a keynote conversation with actor Bradley Whitford of “The West Wing,” timed to the 20th anniversary of “An Inconvenient Truth.”

Gore invoked the scenario depicted in the 2004 disaster film “The Day After Tomorrow”, saying a shutdown of the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation, commonly called the Gulf Stream, is “a very real threat within the next 25 years.”

“That movie that I mentioned, ‘The Day After’ about the Gulf Stream shutting down, well, this morning in one of the English newspapers is a whole big article summarizing the recent dire warnings of the scientists who found yet more confirmatory information…”

The claim is related to Gore’s assertion that ice cap melt will disrupt global oceans volumes and salinity, leading to a a change in the gulf stream and the distribution of heat to higher latitudes.  However, Gore’s predictions (and the predictions of the scientists he cites) on ice melt have been widely debunked.  

In a 2009 speech at the Copenhagen Climate Conference, Mr. Gore cited researchers who he said projected a 75% chance the Arctic could be nearly ice-free during some summer months within five to seven years — a forecast that did not materialize. The researcher he cited, Naval Postgraduate School professor Wieslaw Maslowski, said afterward that he did not know how the 75% figure had been arrived at.

In reality, the kind of ice melt Al Gore warns about is projected to take centuries or even thousands of years, causing millimeters per year of ocean rise which is barely noticeable and not catastrophic.  It is interesting, though, that Gore has jumped on the idea of a new Ice Age, given the numerous doomsday prediction by climate scientists over the decades are now proving frivolous.  

The truth is, the Earth has been far warmer (and rarely colder) than temperatures are today.  Global warming science relies on a rigged data window:  The temperature history that “experts” use only goes back to the 1880s.  This is a tiny sliver of the Earths atmospheric history that is completely inadequate to understanding climate change, which is a natural process, not man-made.  

There is also no concrete evidence supporting the claim of correlation or causation of carbon emissions to global warming.  The data over millions of years simply does not match.

The climate change grift is a creation of the Club of Rome from the 1970s to the 1990s.  It was a UN associated group of prominent elites which sought to fabricate a rationale for global governance.  What they came up with was “global environmental disaster” as a way to motivate the populace to accept more centralized control of industry, trade and energy. 

Al Gore is a long time member of the Club of Rome, according to the groups own documentation.  He often cites the Club of Rome’s 1972 report “Limits Of Growth” as a basis for his ideological beliefs.  

Authored by Aldgra Fredly via The Epoch Times,

The U.S. State Department announced on April 28 that it will release limited-edition passports featuring a picture of President Donald Trump to commemorate America’s 250th anniversary of independence.

State Department spokesman Tommy Pigott said in a statement to multiple news outlets that the department would release “a limited number of specially designed U.S. passports to commemorate this historic occasion” in July, but did not specify how many would be issued.

“These passports will feature customized artwork and enhanced imagery while maintaining the same security features that make the U.S. passport the most secure documents in the world,” Pigott said.

The White House posted a mockup of the limited-edition passport on social media, which shows the interior page featuring an image of Trump and his signature in gold, while the back cover displays the “Declaration of Independence” painting by John Trumbull.

“Patriot passport unlocked. Limited edition. Stamped for America 250,” the White House said in the X post.

The only presidents featured in current U.S. passports are in a double-page depiction of Mount Rushmore in South Dakota—George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Theodore Roosevelt and Abraham Lincoln.

Other depictions include the Statue of Liberty, the Liberty Bell and Independence Hall in Philadelphia, and scenes of the Great Plains, mountains, and islands. Current passports also contain quotations from Martin Luther King Jr. as well as Presidents Washington, Jefferson, Theodore Roosevelt, John F. Kennedy, and Dwight Eisenhower.